High Court Kerala High Court

Saju @ Mrugam Saju vs State Of Kerala on 25 June, 2007

Kerala High Court
Saju @ Mrugam Saju vs State Of Kerala on 25 June, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1742 of 2007()


1. SAJU @ MRUGAM SAJU, AGED 29,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :25/06/2007

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J.

                            ----------------------

                         Crl.M.C.No.1742 of 2007

                        ----------------------------------------

                  Dated this the 25th day of June 2007


                                   O R D E R

The petitioner is the third accused in the ill famous

Kanichukulangara case. The petitioner was released on bail by

the learned Sessions Judge. The order granting bail was

challenged before this court and by Annexure A2 order dated

21/03/2007 this court refused to interfere with the order

granting bail but felt that appropriate conditions must be

imposed to ensure that the stream of justice is not polluted.

Accordingly, conditions were imposed that the petitioner shall

not leave the jurisdiction of the J.F.C.M Alappuzha until further

orders. Further conditions were imposed about the requirement

of the petitioner reporting before the investigating officer . The

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said

conditions are remaining in force from 21/3/2007. One attempt

made by the petitioner to get the said conditions modified did

not succeed and that prayer was rejected by order dated

12/4/2007. At least now, this court may be pleased to modify the

conditions and permit the petitioner to go to his native place.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mobility

of no other accused is fettered by the imposition of any such

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 2

condition. In these circumstances, the learned counsel prays

that a lenient view may be taken and the conditions may be

modified, if not deleted.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application

most vehemently. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that

the order granting bail to the petitioner as also the subsequent

order passed by this court, are being challenged before the

Supreme Court and the challenge is pending even now. The bail

granted to some other co-accused has also been challenged

before the Supreme Court. In these circumstances, the learned

Public Prosecutor submits that there is no change in

circumstances justifying or warranting the modification or

deletion of the conditions imposed. The learned Public

Prosecutor submits that the investigation is completed and final

report has been filed but for reasons not attributable to the

prosecution, trial has not commenced.

3. This court is disturbed to note that the trial in this

case has not commenced in spite of earlier directions issued.

Reports were called for from the learned Magistrate/Committal

court and the Trial Court/Sessions Court. The reports reveal

that altogether there are 13 accused persons in the crime. All

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 3

accused, except accused 6 and 11 to 13 were committed to the

court of Session long back. The sixth accused has also been now

committed to the court of Session. Cognizance has been taken

by the learned Sessions Judge of the case against the sixth

accused also, by now. There are three more accused alleged as

accused 11 to 13. They were arrayed as accused only after the

arrest of the sixth accused. Accused 11 and 12 have already

surrendered before the Magistrate. They have been enlarged on

bail. The thirteenth accused is absconding. Proceedings against

him are pending. The learned Magistrate has taken the view

that it is not strictly necessary to commit the case against

accused 11 to 13 and that the learned Magistrate can take

cognizance of the case and proceed against the case as a

calender case. C.C.No.214/2007 has been registered. The

learned Public Prosecutor submits that the registration of the

C.C is not justified and that, at any rate, the case against A11 to

A13 also deserves to be committed to the court of Session, at

least under Section 323 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate in the

report also submits that the case can be committed under

Section 323 Cr.P.C.

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 4

4. The facts of the case reveal that it will be in the

interests of due and proper administration of justice that such a

case which has left scars in the public mind is taken up for trial

and disposed of as expeditiously as possible. In the interests of

the petitioner against whom stringent conditions remain in force

also, such expeditious disposal is absolutely necessary. I am, in

these circumstances, satisfied that appropriate directions can

and ought to be issued to the learned Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha and the learned Sessions Judge,

Alappuzha to ensure that the case against all the available

accused, that is, A1 to A12 are taken up and disposed of as

expeditiously as possible. The learned Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha shall forthwith commit the case in

so far as it relates to A11 and A12 under Section 323 Cr.P.C to

the court of Session. Such committal shall be made as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within fifteen days from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The case against the

absconding accused A13 can be split up straight away. S.82 and

83 proceedings A13 can be continued and the same if necessary

can be transferred to the list of long pending cases. The

committal of the case against A11 and A12 need not wait any

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 5

longer. The learned Principal Sessions Judge shall also ensure

that the case against A1 to A12 are consolidated and the trial

proper is commenced as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

within a period of two months from this date. Compliance shall

be reported to this court forthwith.

5. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is, in these

circumstances, dismissed with the above observations.

6. Hand over copy of this order to the learned

Prosecutor for immediate production before the learned

Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge. The registry shall send

copies to both of them forthwith and shall communicate the

directions over the telephone to ensure expedition.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 6

Crl.M.C.No.1742/07 7

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007